Problem-based learning, unbeknownst to many educators, has been around for two decades. A brief history of the evolution of PBL shows innovation comprised of four elements: an ill-structured problem, substantive content, student apprenticeship, and self-directed learning. Research evidence supporting its effectiveness is not numerous but tends to support that PBL is better than traditional instruction on a number of variables, including long-term information retention, conceptual understanding, and self-directed learning. PBL can be modified with integrity into elementary, middle, and high school classrooms for the gifted.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarrowsH. (1985). How to design a problem-based curriculum for pre-clinical years. New York: Springer.
2.
BarrowsH. (1988). The tutorial process. Springfield: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.
3.
BarrowsH. (1994). Practice-based learning. Springfield: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.
4.
BerlinerD. (1986). Catastrophes and interactions: Comments on “The mistaken metaphor.” In MakerC. J. (Ed.), Critical issues in gifted education: Defensible programs for the gifted (pp. 31–38). Rockville, MD: Aspen.
5.
BettsG. (1985). Autonomous learner model for the gifted and talented. Greeley, CO: Autonomous Learning Publications and Specialists.
6.
BlumbergP.MichaelJ. A. (1991). The development of self-directed learning behavior in a partially teacher-centered problem-based learning curriculum. Teaching and Learning Medicine, 4, 3–8.
7.
BoudD.FelettiG. (1991). The challenge of problem-based learning. New York: St. Martin's.
8.
BransfordJ. D.VyeN. J. (1989). A perspective on cognitive research and its implications for instruction. In ResnickL. B.KlopferL. E., (Eds.), Toward the thinking curriculum (pp. 173–205). Reston, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
9.
BrownR. (1990). Schools of thought: How the politics of literacy shape thinking in the classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
BruerJ. T. (1993). The mind's journey from novice to expert. American Education, Summer, 6–46.
11.
BrunerJ. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12.
CallahanC. M. (1996). A critical self-study of gifted education: Healthy practice, necessary evil, or sedition?Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 148–163.
CarterM. (1988). Problem solving reconsidered: A pluralistic theory of problems. College English, 50, 551–565.
15.
ChandI.RuncoM. A. (1993). Problem finding skills as components in the creative process. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 155–162.
16.
Center for Gifted Education. (1997). Acid, acid everywhere: A problem-based unit. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
17.
DodsR. F. (1997). An action research study of the effectiveness of problem-based learning in promoting the acquisition and retention of knowledge. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 423–437.
18.
EdmunsonK. M. (1994). Concept maps and the development of cases for problem-based learning. Academic Medicine, 69, 108–110.
19.
Education Development Center (1970). Man: A course of study. Cambridge, MA: Author
20.
EnnisR. (1962). A concept of critical thinking. Harvard Educational Review, 32(1), 81–111.
21.
GallagherJ. J. (1996). A critique of critiques of gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 234–249.
22.
GallagherJ. J.GallagherS. A. (1995). Teaching the gifted child (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
23.
GallagherS. A. (1996, November). The effect of problem-based learning on complex thought. Presentation at the annual meeting of the National Association for Gifted Children, Indianapolis.
24.
GallagherS. A.SherB. T.StepienW. J.WorkmanD. (1995). Implementing problem-based learning in the science classroom. School Science and Mathematics, 95, 136–146.
25.
GallagherS. A.StepienW. J. (1996). Depth versus breadth in problem-based learning: Content acquisition in American studies. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 257–275.
26.
GallagherS. A.StepienW. J.RosenthalH. (1994). The effects of problem-based learning on problem solving. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 195–200.
27.
GoldbergerN. R. (1981). Developmental assumptions underlying models of general education. Liberal Education, 67, 233–243.
28.
MakerC. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
29.
MartensenD.ErikssonH.Ingleman-SundbergM. (1985). Medical chemistry: Evaluation of active and problem-oriented teaching methods. Medical Education, 19, 34–42.
30.
MinstrellJ. (1989). Teaching science for understanding. In ResnickL. B.KlopferL. E. (Eds.), Toward the thinking curriculum (pp. 129–149). Reston, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
31.
MullerS. (1984, November). Physicians for the twenty-first century: Report of the project panel on the general professional education of the physician and college preparation for medicine. Journal of Medical Education, 59, (pt. 2).
32.
MurphyJ. M.GilliganC. (1980). Moral development in late adolescence and adulthood: A critique and reconstruction of Kohlberg's theory. Human Development, 23, 77–104.
33.
NewmannF. M. (1992). Higher order thinking and prospects for classroom thoughtfulness. In NewmannF. M. (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools (pp. 62–91). New York: Teachers College Press.
34.
NormanG. R.SchmidtH. G. (1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 67, 557–565.
35.
PatelV. K.GroenG. J.NormanG. R. (1991). Effects of conventional and problem-based medical curricula on problem solving. Academic Medicine, 66, 380–389.
36.
PaulR. (1993). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world. Santa Rosa: CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking.
37.
RabinowitzM.GlaserR. (1985). Cognitive structure and process in highly competent performance. In HorowitzF. D.O'BrienM. (Eds.), The gifted and talented: Developmental perspectives (pp. 75–98). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
38.
ResnickL. B.KlopferL. E. (1989). Toward the thinking curriculum. In. ResnickL. B.KlopferL. E. (Eds.), Toward the thinking curriculum: Current cognitive research (pp. 1–18). Reston, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
39.
RenzulliJ. S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide to developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
40.
RogersK. (1986). Do the gifted think and learn differently: A review of recent research and its implications. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 17–40.
41.
RossB. (1991). Towards a framework for problem-based curricula. In BoudD.FelettiG. (Eds.), The challenge of problem-based learning (pp. 34–41). New York: St. Martin's.
42.
SawyerR. (1988). In defense of academic rigor. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11(2), 5–19.
43.
SchmidtH. G. (1984). Introduction. In SchmidtH. G.de VolderM. L. (Eds.), Tutorials in problem-based learning: New directions in training for the health professions (pp. 9–15). Maastricht, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum.
44.
SchmidtH. G.De GraveW. S.De VolderM. S.MoustJ. H. C.PatelV. L. (1989). Explanatory models in the processing of science tests: The role of prior knowledge activation through small-group discussion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 610–619.
45.
SchmidtH. G.MoustJ. C. (1995). What makes a tutor effective? A structural-equations modeling approach to learning in problem-based curricula. Academic Medicine, 70, 708–714.
46.
ShoenfeldA. H. (1989). Teaching mathematical thinking and problem solving. In ResnickL. B.KlopferL. E. (Eds.), Toward the thinking curriculum: Current cognitive research (pp. 83–103). Reston, VA: Association for Curriculum Development.
47.
SpiroR. J.CoulsonR. L.FeltovichP. J.AndersonD. K. (1988). Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Proceedings of the 10th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
48.
StepienW. J.GallagherS. A. (1993). Problem-based learning: As authentic as it gets. Educational Leadership, 50(7), 25–29.
49.
StepienW. J.GallagherS. A.WorkmanD. (1993). Problem-based learning for traditional and interdisciplinary classrooms. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 338–357.
50.
StepienW. J.PykeS. (1997). Designing problem-based learning units. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 380–400.
51.
SternbergR. J.DavidsonJ. E. (1985). Cognitive development in the gifted and talented. In HorowitzF. D.O'BrienM. (Eds.), The gifted and talented: Developmental perspectives (pp. 37–74). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
52.
TreffingerD. J.IsaksenS. G.DorvalK. B. (1994). Creative problem solving: An overview. In RuncoM. A. (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 223–236). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
VossJ. F. (1989). Problem solving and the educational process. In GlaserR.LesgoldA. (Eds.), Foundations for a psychology of education (pp. 251–294). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
55.
WaltonH. J.MatthewsM. B. (1989). Essentials of problem-based learning. Medical Education, 23, 542–558.
56.
WhiteheadA. N. (1967). The aims of education and other essays. New York: Free Press.
57.
WigginsG. (1989, November). The futility of trying to teach everything of importance. Educational Leadership, 46, 44–59.
58.
WilkinsonW. K.MaxwellS. (1991). The influence of college students' epistemological style of selected problem-solving processes. Research in Higher Education, 32, 333–350.
